The primetime English-language news show by China’s state broadcaster was about to go on air when a copy editor in Beijing was handed a script that needed an urgent last-minute polish.
Gary Anglebrandt’s job at China Global Television Network was to check for errors in grammar and spelling before passing the text to the on-duty laoshi — teacher in Mandarin — who controls all copy for political correctness before anything goes on air.
When his colleague approached him with the “sheepish look” of a person carrying something “abhorrent”, he realised something was wrong. It turned out to be the pre-trial confession of Simon Cheng, a former employee of the UK consulate in Hong Kong, who has since claimed he was tortured by police and forced to admit to the crimes that warranted his detention.
“I knew there was no point in going to the producer and saying ‘we’re not going to run this,’” says Anglebrandt, who worked for the broadcaster between 2016 and 2019 and has provided a rare insight into its operations. “They will say ‘it came from upstairs, we have to run it.’”
Anglebrandt, who had at the time already handed in his resignation as he did not feel comfortable with CGTN’s coverage of the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, adds: “If you say no, you are essentially going against the entire Chinese system.”
This pressure from “upstairs” that Anglebrandt describes is one of the main reasons the channel has clashed with media regulators in some of the western countries it has targeted.
His testimony also gets to the heart of the dilemma that China has faced over the past decade as it has tried to use massive investments in foreign-language media to improve its international image.
The international expansion of CGTN has been a major part of a Chinese soft power push that began in earnest with the Beijing Olympics in 2008. The channel launched well-funded broadcasting hubs in Washington and Nairobi in 2011 and then in London in 2019.
For China, the channel is part of a geopolitical battle for the hearts and minds of the world. Angered by what it views as the bias of the international media against the ruling Communist party, Beijing has thrown considerable resources behind its own media groups in a bid to spread “a Chinese perspective” around the world. It has been looking to develop tools that will rival the global reach of the BBC in the media sector or Hollywood in entertainment. And in some parts of the world, CGTN has won a large viewership.
But it is precisely the role played by the Chinese Communist party in CGTN that has hampered its ability to find a broader audience. Authorities in both the US and UK have taken steps to limit its reach after investigations concluded that CGTN is not merely funded by the state but takes its cues directly from the party.
The most public and humiliating reverse was the decision in February by Ofcom, the UK regulator, to revoke its British broadcasting licence — a decision that was likely influenced by CGTN’s broadcast of forced confessions.
In a political and media environment as tightly controlled as that in China, CGTN has struggled to draw a credible distinction between its “Chinese perspective” on the world and state propaganda.
Sarah Cook, a researcher at the US-funded democracy group Freedom House, says that judging by the number of countries in which CGTN programmes are available on television sets and social media platforms, the network has been “pretty effective”.
However many people, she says, especially in the West are “rightly sceptical of content that they know is coming from Chinese state media”.
A decade after its big expansion began, little is known about the inner workings of CGTN’s newsrooms — even though during that time it has grown to reach just over 200m households outside of China, according to estimates by Ampere Analysis.
Beijing insists that CGTN is no different to any state-backed broadcaster and is committed to principles of “objectivity, rationality and balance”.
Former CGTN journalists and executives dispute this image, arguing that while the foreign hubs were free to produce legitimate journalistic work on some issues, reporters and editors were blocked from approaching stories that exposed China to criticism.
Out of the 12 former employees who spoke to the Financial Times, most have asked to remain anonymous. Several cite fear of retaliation, especially following the arrest of former CGTN news anchor Cheng Lei. The Australian national was charged in February with leaking state secrets overseas and scrubbed off the network.
CGTN declined to comment for this article.
One former senior editor in Washington, who joined after being assured the newsroom would operate much like its western equivalents, says he soon realised the executives transplanted from Beijing had “much stricter control of the product”.
“Nothing was allowed to appear in script or anchor pages that reflected anything bad about China,” he says, recounting a story that was quietly dropped as it questioned the behaviour of a Chinese subcontractor operating in Europe.
But CGTN’s implied editorial rules did at times lead to confrontational situations, one of which came during a 2012 visit to Washington by Xi Jinping, then vice-president of China. His visit to the White House drew protests against China’s policies towards Tibet, Taiwan and the spiritual movement Falun Gong, prompting debates in the newsroom about how their presence should be explained.
An early script that mentioned the protest ended up with “red marks all over”, but when former White House Correspondent Jessica Stone did her live segment, the protesters were so loud she had to mention them.
“There was panic in the newsroom, all the bosses huddled over and began yelling,” one former editor says, adding that several people involved with the broadcast were made to promise in private meetings that such transgressions would never be repeated.
‘Wolf warrior’ diplomacy
Still, the foreign hubs enjoy greater independence than the Beijing headquarters, which produces the majority of the programmes that run on CGTN’s 24-hour broadcasts.
In Beijing, “the face of censorship in the newsroom is the laoshi,” says Anglebrandt, a view confirmed by another former producer and a news anchor. “There are always two or three in the broadcast newsroom and all scripts go from the Chinese writers to the foreign copy editors who make [the English] sound more natural, and then to the laoshi who checks it for political correctness,” he adds.
The bosses in charge of CGTN’s foreign newsrooms knew they would have to be different from that in Beijing. Alan Adair, who set up the Washington hub’s technical operations in 2011 after five years at Al Jazeera, says it tried to “break away from Beijing” in terms of the channel’s look but added there were still “no-go areas”.
Adair says Ma Jing, the executive in charge of the operation at the time, was keen to poach staff from Qatari-funded Al Jazeera, which won notoriety when it aired video messages from former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
“They liked what they had done with Al Jazeera, transforming what was known as bin Laden’s channel to something that was being watched in the White House,” says one former CGTN executive.
The network also turned to WPP-owned advertising agency Ogilvy, which won a contract with the network after it offered to help recruit “credible” experts to sign opinion pieces for its website promoting “the need for a voice that understands what is really going on in Asia”.
Christopher Graves, the former chief executive of Ogilvy Public Relations who met with senior CGTN executives, says that “back in 2011, things felt more optimistic than today, and there was great hope for a US-China engagement going forward, and hope for a changing China”.
Cook, the researcher, argues that growing international scrutiny of the Chinese government’s conduct, especially its treatment of Uyghurs in the northwestern province of Xinjiang, where as many as 1m people have been detained, has unleashed a more “aggressive kind of reporting, the wolf warrior diplomacy stuff”, on CGTN’s channels.
Stone, the Washington correspondent who left CGTN in 2019 after nearly eight years at the network, says she is “grateful” for her time there and the insights she garnered into “the Chinese mindset” but she eventually left due to editorial concerns.
She too argues that CGTN was a different organisation a decade ago. It had been an “experiment” under previous president Hu Jintao but edicts became stricter, she adds, when Xi took over the leadership of China in 2013. “I did see a lot of change from the beginning to the end,” she says.
The mood in Washington also became much more critical of China, especially during the Trump administration.
“Then Xinjiang happened,” Stone says. “I was seeing a lot of pressure over Xinjiang and words put into people’s mouths and I was not interested in having any part of that.”
The Chinese government’s ruminations on how best to communicate with the outside world began decades ago. But it was not until the 2008 Beijing Olympics, when foreign media outlets turned their attention to China’s relationship with Tibet, rampant air pollution and various claims of human rights violations, that the CCP decided it needed to urgently take charge of its image abroad.
Hoping to build international influence in line with “China’s economic and social development as well as its global status”, as a 2009 document put it, the central government set out to learn from experts in the field.
One former senior editor at CGTN’s Washington office recounts when one of his bosses sent from Beijing to run the network explained how they had been instructed to find out more about soft power from the Americans.
“Mickey Mouse laughing in the happiest place of the world puts a good face on the US globally,” he remembers the executive saying over an after-work martini. “The Chinese are just beginning to learn how to do that, and that is one of the reasons we are here.”
The network, which used the name of its domestic parent group CCTV until concern over the awkward namesake with the camera surveillance system prompted a rebrand in foreign markets, was in its first years relatively successful and even won multiple awards, including an Emmy for a short documentary.
But by 2019, when CGTN opened its state of the art European hub in London, regulators in the US had forced several Chinese media outlets to register as foreign agents, later requiring staff to comply with the same rules that govern foreign embassies.
“It became personal because the US government is now able to pull all your records, and I’m not a lobbyist, I’m a journalist,” says Stone, who now works for outlets such as Fox News.
The Trump administration’s hostile stance towards Beijing fuelled its push to limit the influence of CGTN, but so did a little-advertised restructure of Chinese media assets that was designed to strengthen the Communist party’s control over state broadcasters. In 2018, China’s Central Propaganda Department usurped a more liberal body and became the main watchdog of China Media Group, a conglomerate formed the same year that includes CGTN.
An adviser to the State Council, China’s chief administrative authority, says the reform greatly impacted how the country’s foreign propaganda operates. Unlike the former regulatory body, which was staffed by officials with international experience and expertise, the propaganda department has traditionally focused on China’s domestic media and lacks skills needed to translate edicts from the top into something that can be digested abroad.
“The Central Propaganda Department is treating foreign and domestic propaganda as the same thing even though the two are very different,” the adviser says.
Cook connects “more demonising content . . . flowing into the area of disinformation”, such as Chinese reports that the Covid-19 pandemic originated in the US, directly with the move to bring state media channels under control of the country’s propaganda department.
“Are they accessing much larger global audiences than they used to do? Yes,” says Cook. However, she argues that the success of China’s attempts at becoming the global superpower is not easy to assess.
Pew Research surveys show that the proportion of people with a “favourable” view of China has largely gone down in the past decade, particularly in countries where CGTN has established a presence.
It is, however, difficult to draw straight conclusions from trends in other countries. In Brazil, China’s most important economic partner in South America, attitudes have remained fairly steady and they have improved in Israel, a strategic ally in the Middle East.
“The only area where CGTN can point to great success is in Africa,” says one former adviser to the network. America, he says, has been “pretty much a disaster”.
The most stinging rebuke CGTN has received was the decision in February by Ofcom, the UK regulator, to revoke its British broadcasting licence. But since then, CGTN has quietly regained its right to air in several European countries including the UK by moving under French jurisdiction.
CGTN is putting much more emphasis on online platforms rather than television, whose audience is declining. One reason for this shift is the growing scrutiny from foreign regulators. “They have realised it is much more difficult [for foreign authorities] to control what comes out over the internet,” a former executive says.
A digital strategy does, however, come with its own challenges. Tweets by CGTN are labelled “state-affiliated” by Twitter. Google-owned YouTube warns CGTN viewers that it is funded by the Chinese government — in contrast to the BBC’s World Service, which is independent from the government and simply labelled a public service broadcaster.
Still, online rules are significantly less stringent than those that govern traditional broadcasting. CGTN’s broadcasts of allegedly forced confessions, which in March contributed to a £225,000 fine in the UK, are still available on YouTube, which told the FT the video of Cheng’s pre-trial confession did not violate its guidelines.
In the EU, countries are increasingly worried over alleged Chinese influence-buying and propaganda. The European Commission has acknowledged “growing concern over Chinese state media engagement in Europe”, with state-affiliated media representatives making “extensive use” of the 27-member EU’s openness to promote Beijing’s official positions.
According to a report published in April by the EU’s diplomatic service, state media outlets such as CGTN have “intensively” promoted Chinese Covid-19 vaccines and attempted to “undermine trust in western-made vaccines, EU institutions and western/European vaccination strategies”.
Other aspects of Beijing’s influence-building have come in the shape of coronavirus assistance programmes and the subsequent media reports about them. “It is not direct propaganda, but it is the same thing,” says the former senior editor at CGTN’s Washington office. “‘Hello, I’m from China, I’m here to save you’ — if they can figure out how to manufacture a Chinese Mickey Mouse, they will do it.”
China reaffirms plans to beef up oversight of foreign listings
Chinese politics & policy updates
Sign up to myFT Daily Digest to be the first to know about Chinese politics & policy news.
Beijing reiterated its intention to strengthen oversight of overseas listings on Friday, capping a volatile week during which contradictory policy signals rocked the share prices of Chinese companies.
At its mid-year meeting, the Chinese Communist party’s politburo stated its determination to “improve” the regulatory framework for companies listing shares overseas. It was the first time the politburo, comprised of the party’s top 25 officials, had specifically addressed the issue.
Chinese regulators have been angered by Didi Chuxing’s decision to press ahead with a $4.4bn initial public offering in New York last month, despite their concerns about the ride-hailing group’s data security practices.
Senior party and government officials have subsequently vowed stricter oversight of overseas listings, which will now require clearance from the country’s internet regulator. Didi’s shares have plunged as other Chinese companies cancelled or delayed plans to list outside of the country.
Investor confidence in Chinese tech companies was further dented on Monday when Beijing revealed draconian new rules for the country’s booming private education sector. The share prices of New York-listed tutoring companies collapsed, after which a senior securities regulator sought to reassure financial executives that Beijing was not seeking to ‘“decouple” Chinese companies from US and other overseas markets.
The comments by Fang Xinghai, vice-chair of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, on Wednesday helped stop a broader sell-off of Chinese shares. But they were not enough to prevent a more than 20 per cent monthly decline in US-listed Chinese tech companies.
Chinese officials have shown no sign of reining in their crackdown of the country’s largest tech groups for alleged violations of monopoly and data security laws.
Separately, China’s transportation ministry on Friday signalled an intensification of the measures against Didi and other ride-hailing groups. It said in a statement that companies in the sector must improve compliance over network and data security management to better protect customers’ personal data. Stronger supervision of antitrust practices, as well as improved rights of workers in the sector, was also needed, it said.
The statement did not name specific companies but noted that the government’s transport sector oversight is being directed by President Xi Jinping.
The Chinese government is conscious that the campaigns against tech and education companies could dent already fragile private sector confidence as the government tries to boost slowing economic growth.
Liu He, a Chinese vice-premier and the country’s top economic and financial official, sought to reassure representatives of small and medium-sized enterprises on July 27, acknowledging that they were the “main source” of employment. “The Chinese economy will do well only if SMEs do well,” he added.
While China has rebounded strongly from the Covid-19 pandemic, officials have been concerned by slowing infrastructure investment — an essential driver of the world’s second-largest economy. The politburo suggested it would encourage more fiscal spending and local government debt issuance to accelerate economic growth.
The Chinese government has also struggled to contain a new outbreak of Covid-19’s Delta variant, which has spread across the country from an airport in eastern China.
Additional reporting by Edward White in Seoul
More questions than answers in a Hong Kong courtroom
Hong Kong politics updates
Sign up to myFT Daily Digest to be the first to know about Hong Kong politics news.
Leaving Hong Kong’s district court last week, I saw a group of pro-Beijing people waving the Chinese national flag. They had a handwritten banner saying: “Injustice waiting to be undone.”
In July 2019, more than 100 white T-shirt-clad men armed with metal rods indiscriminately attacked pro-democracy protesters, journalists and commuters in Yuen Long station. The incident shocked Hong Kongers to their core.
Last week, seven of the so-called “white shirts” attackers were sentenced to between three and a half and seven years for rioting and wounding. Friends and families of the victims sat in the public gallery. They were joined by supporters of the white-clad men. An old man carrying the red flag into the public gallery cried, “This is unjust. We have to report the case to President Xi Jinping.”
But for many people, the Yuen Long incident was one of the darkest moments during the 2019 Hong Kong anti-government protests.
I was on the streets that day, covering the protesters when they defaced Beijing’s main office in the territory — the first time they had targeted an important symbol of the national government. As the police tear-gassed the area, a protester told me to go to Yuen Long. It was the first I had heard of the incident.
Police officers arrived at the scene late, despite numerous emergency calls, and a nearby police station shut its gate. The alleged police inaction, both on that day and afterwards, has fuelled public distrust of law enforcement.
“Such unscrupulous mass lynching has caused great panic among the citizens and the court must impose a deterrent sentence on the perpetrator,” said Judge Eddie Yip as he read out his judgment. “The passengers’ defences were only a few umbrellas and a few brave young bodies standing at the front,” Judge Yip added.
However, to the victims, the public and even the defendants, the tough sentences have not resolved public discontent, and many questions remain unanswered. For example, despite arresting 63 people related to the case, no mastermind behind the attack has been identified and only eight white-shirts have been brought to court. By contrast, police have arrested thousands of pro-democracy activists, including alleged leaders such as Jimmy Lai and Joshua Wong.
A victim who tried to protect a journalist, and who was hit in the mouth during the attack, told the FT: “If we can’t find out who directs this, who’s involved and bring them to the public, the court is not going to solve this, nor [be] able to help in solving this.”
The wife of Tang Wai-sum, who was sentenced to seven years for his part in the attack, organised a press conference against the “harsh” judgment. “My husband is only an ordinary villager, a small-business owner,” she said. He was only there to “protect his home”.
Alex Yeung, a pro-Beijing YouTuber, sat next to Mrs Tang at the press conference. “The judge is ‘yellow’,” he said, pounding the table angrily. He was referring to the colour used by pro-democracy groups. “I hope the national security law and the independent commission against corruption will investigate this judge.”
The victim who was hit in the face, who was also a witness in the case, said: “both sides are asking for truth: the protesters want to know who directed this, the villagers [locals in Yuen Long] or pro-Beijing people are also making clips they say reflect the ‘truth’. So we need to have an institution to lay out the facts and find all the things behind [it].”
Attempts to find out the truth have been hindered. Bao Choy, a journalist who investigated police conduct during the attack, was convicted and fined for the criminal offence of making false statements.
At one point the police attempted to define the incident as a “mass fight” and “conflict” between “people with different political beliefs” instead of an attack. Seven other people, including former legislative councillor Lam Cheuk-ting, who was injured by the attackers, have been charged with participating in a riot. This trial has been adjourned to 2023.
One court may have made a decision about what happened at Yuen Long, but many people feel the truth is yet to be revealed.
Beijing seeks to ease fears on Wall Street after tech crackdown
Chinese equities updates
Sign up to myFT Daily Digest to be the first to know about Chinese equities news.
China’s securities regulator has sought to pacify concerns among international investors and banks after tough new restrictions on private education companies sent shockwaves through markets.
Regulators in Beijing held a call with executives from global investors, Wall Street banks and Chinese financial groups on Wednesday night, according to three people familiar with the matter. One of the people said there were about 12 attendees including executives from BlackRock, Fidelity, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan.
The call sought to reassure the groups after China issued an effective ban on the country’s $100bn private tutoring industry at the weekend.
News of the call boosted Chinese shares, which had suffered a punishing week amid a slate of regulatory action. The Hong Kong-listed shares of internet groups Tencent and Alibaba jumped 8.4 per cent and 6.7 per cent, respectively, as the broader Hang Seng Tech index rose 7 per cent.
China’s CSI 300 index of Shanghai- and Shenzhen-listed stocks was up 1.5 per cent, while the tech-focused ChiNext index gained 3.7 per cent.
One person briefed on the call hosted by the China Securities Regulatory Commission said it showed that the Chinese government was not “completely tone-deaf to international investors’ sentiment”, but added that it did not do much to assuage concerns about future regulatory policies.
“These policies are not coming from the CSRC, they’re coming from much higher up. It’s clear there will be more to come, that’s obvious to everyone,” the person said.
During the call, CSRC vice-chair Fang Xinghai told the international groups China was committed to allowing companies to access capital markets and that the action on education technology businesses was an isolated situation, according to the person.
The person said that a number of people asked the CSRC about whether regulators would target the “variable interest entity” structure that many large Chinese tech groups have used to list overseas. However, the questions were not answered definitively, the person said.
The crackdown on private tutoring companies included restrictions on their ability to use the VIE structure, which has also been used by tech companies including Alibaba and Pinduoduo to list in the US. The structure, which is not legally recognised in China, allows global investors to get around controls on foreign ownership in some Chinese industries.
The latest restrictions on tutoring groups prompted worries that regulators could target the structure more widely.
Fang said he was not interested in talking to journalists when contacted by the Financial Times.
One person close to the CSRC said regulators “didn’t expect the policy to have such a big impact on investor sentiment and [are] keen to send the message that it is business as usual . . . but everyone felt the crackdown is too much and there is no regulatory boundary. Investors will have to reprice China risks going forward”.
Regulatory pressure from Beijing on tech groups has escalated rapidly over the past month. Authorities have initiated an overhaul of how Chinese companies list overseas and the country’s cyber security regulator has announced plans to review all overseas listings of groups with more than 1m users on national security grounds.
The new cyber security rules were announced just days after ride-hailing app Didi Chuxing raised $4.4bn in a New York initial public offering last month. Its shares have since fallen 40 per cent.
The actions have prompted a scramble on Wall Street to redirect IPOs of Chinese companies from New York to Hong Kong. The US has not approved a major transaction from a Chinese group since the Didi episode left global investors nursing large losses.
Tencent spooked markets further on Tuesday when it announced it was suspending user registrations for its flagship WeChat app while it upgraded its security technology to “to align with all relevant laws and regulations”.
Chinese state media has sought to put investors at ease in the wake of sharp falls for shares in Shanghai and Shenzhen. An article on Wednesday by Xinhua said the CSRC maintains an “open attitude” on where Chinese companies list.
BlackRock, Fidelity and JPMorgan did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Goldman Sachs declined to comment.
With additional reporting by Edward White and Ryan McMorrow
'It’s more than sport – every day we are fighting for our rights to be equal’
US regulators launch crackdown on Chinese listings
Robinhood push to democratise finance falters with own shares
Italy’s government in crisis as Renzi ministers resign
Macron’s war on ‘Islamic separatism’ only divides France further
US allows sales of chips to Huawei’s non-5G businesses
Europe7 months ago
Italy’s government in crisis as Renzi ministers resign
Europe9 months ago
Macron’s war on ‘Islamic separatism’ only divides France further
Emerging Markets9 months ago
US allows sales of chips to Huawei’s non-5G businesses
Europe8 months ago
European truckmakers to phase out diesel sales decade earlier than planned
Emerging Markets10 months ago
Mexico’s Supreme Court approves referendum on presidential trials
Company9 months ago
Most investors now expect the U.S. stock market to crash like it did in October 1987 — why that’s good news
Markets9 months ago
Two top Morgan Stanley commodities traders lose jobs over use of WhatsApp
Emerging Markets9 months ago
Arrest of Mexican general in US shakes López Obrador at home and abroad